ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

H.C.A. No.424 & 425 of 2022

___________________________________________________________________ Date Order with signature of Judge

___________________________________________________________________

H.C.A. No.424/2022.

FRESH CASE:

1. For order on CMA No.4284/2022 (Urgent).

2. For order on office objection a/w reply as at ‘A’.

3. For order on CMA No.4285/2022 (Exemption).

4. For hearing of main case.

5. For order on CMA No.4286/2022 (Stay).

H.C.A. No.425/2022.

FRESH CASE:

1. For order on CMA No.4287/2022 (Urgent).

2. For order on office objection a/w reply as at ‘A’.

3. For order on CMA No.4288/2022 (Exemption).

4. For hearing of main case.

5. For order on CMA No.4289/2022 (Stay).

-----------

Dated; 20^th December 2022

Mr. Muhammad Nazim Khokhar, Advocate for Appellants in both appeals.

-*-*-*-*-*-

1. Urgency granted.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant undertakes to comply with office objection(s) before next date of hearing.

3. Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.

4&5. Instant High Court Appeals have been filed against the impugned order dated 07.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Suit No.384 of 2006 alongwith Suit No.383 of 2006, whereby, according to learned counsel for the appellants, the learned Single Judge has been pleased to issue direction for preliminary decree in terms of Order XX Rules 13 and 18 CPC with further direction that Nazir will undertake further proceedings in pursuance thereof and will make an attempt to distribute undisputed moveable and immovable properties amongst legal heirs in accordance with their respective share(s). Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there was a family settlement between the parties executed in the year 1986, therefore, the learned Single Judge would have passed an order requiring all the parties to abide the aforesaid family settlement instead of issuing directions for making preliminary decree.

From perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, it appears that some disputes have been raised by the plaintiffs in the suit with regard to the family settlement agreement in respect of some of the properties, therefore, the learned Single Judge would have been passed appropriate order and that too, by consent of the parties for making preliminary decree in respect of the undisputed properties. We do not find any factual error or legal infirmity in the impugned order, whereas, instant High Court Appeals appear to be misconceived, which are accordingly dismissed in limine. However, the appellants are at liberty to approach the learned Single Judge seeking appropriate order on the basis of the family settlement agreement, if all the parties consent for disposal of the suit in such terms in accordance with law.

J U D G E

*Farhan/PS*